Hi Norbert,
Thanks for getting back to us on that. I'll make sure that wording
change goes in. We'd also spotted the schema reference so that is being
fixed now also.
kind regards,
Dave
On 09/05/2013 04:19, Norbert Lindenberg wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
> This is essentially what I asked for, so I'm satisfied.
>
> Two nits though:
> - "as time of writing" should probably be "at the time of writing".
> - There's still a reference to ruby in the Schematron schema in appendix D.
>
> Norbert
>
>
> On May 7, 2013, at 17:33 , Dave Lewis wrote:
>
>> Hi Norbert,
>> Thanks you for you input on the Ruby topic. This is to confirm that we have now removed the Ruby section from the ITS2.0 editors draft and included an appendix H stating:
>>
>> "H. Ruby and ITS 2.0 (Non-Normative)
>>
>> ITS 1.0 provided the Ruby data category. ITS 2.0 does not provide ruby since as time of writing, a stable model for ruby was not available. There are ongoing discussions about the ruby model in HTML5. Once these discussions are settled, in a subsequent version of ITS, the ruby data category may be re-introduced."
>>
>> Please inidicate if you are satisfied with the response. If we don't hear from you within two week we will take it you are satisfied.
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>> Dave
>>
>> On 09/04/2013 18:42, Felix Sasaki wrote:
>>> Thank you, Norbert. We are planning to publish a "hearth beat" working draft on Thursday. I then would propose that we remove the section as you suggested, but mention that this is something that we want to get feedback about before leaving last call.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Felix
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 09.04.13 18:53, schrieb Norbert Lindenberg:
>>>> I still think this section should be removed entirely, since it adds no value to the standard in its current form. It might be useful to explain in an appendix why it's been removed, and that it may reappear in a later version.
>>>>
>>>> Norbert
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Apr 8, 2013, at 8:52 , Felix Sasaki wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi i18n colleagues,
>>>>>
>>>>> this issue
>>>>> https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/87
>>>>> "whitespace change in ruby example" is done, see
>>>>> http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#EX-ruby-implementation-1
>>>>>
>>>>> I was wondering how to move forward with this issue
>>>>> https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/91
>>>>> "parts of the ruby section should be removed"
>>>>>
>>>>> We had various discussions about this in the i18n WG. From these I see two options:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) remove the section completely
>>>>> 2) keep the section but have it *mostly* (see below) empty, saying "the ruby model in HTML5 is in flux. The ruby section may be updated in a subsequent version of ITS".
>>>>>
>>>>> The original comment
>>>>> https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/91
>>>>> said that the local part of the ruby section should be removed. But with that, all that would be left is this sentence in the "definition" section:
>>>>>
>>>>> "The Ruby data category is used for a run of text that is associated with another run of text, referred to as the base text. Ruby text is used to provide a short annotation of the associated base text. It is most often used to provide a reading (pronunciation) guide."
>>>>>
>>>>> We could keep that sentence also as part of resolution aproach 2).
>>>>>
>>>>> The global ruby section
>>>>> is like local ruby specific to XHTML, see the names of the "pointer" attributes at
>>>>> http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#ruby-global
>>>>> so it might be rather confusing to keep the global approach. Besides, since ITS1, it seems there has been nobody implementing ruby globally.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>>
>>>>> Felix
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>